Hindsight is 20/20. Find me one person who knew Ryan tannehill would be putting up these kind of numbers and ill find you a liar.

farfromforgotten

11-04-2012 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by soybean
(Post 3173710)

Hindsight is 20/20. Find me one person who knew Ryan tannehill would be putting up these kind of numbers and ill find you a liar.

Tannehill's success doesn't even matter here, IMO. Luck and RG3 are enough to say that this class will be light years better than next years. A better comparison would be the 2011 QB class to the 2013 class.

vidae

11-04-2012 08:05 PM

I think Geno and Tyler Wilson are going to be franchise guys, but yeah, 2012 > 2013 and it isn't close.

soybean

11-04-2012 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by farfromforgotten
(Post 3173719)

Tannehill's success doesn't even matter here, IMO. Luck and RG3 are enough to say that this class will be light years better than next years. A better comparison would be the 2011 QB class to the 2013 class.

I think geno will be rated similarly to rg3 when all is said and done. No one compares to luck. And I think Tyler Wilson will be good.

Not sure if bray will come out and no idea about Barkley.

SolidGold

11-04-2012 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by soybean
(Post 3173710)

Hindsight is 20/20. Find me one person who knew Ryan tannehill would be putting up these kind of numbers and ill find you a liar.

I didn't think Tannehill would be so good so fast but I was one of his biggest supporters.

2012 is much better than 2013.

Barkley did show more than enough arm strength and deep ball accuracy yesterday though to leave me impressed. Smith's stock should be falling - very overrated.

YotoJets007

11-04-2012 08:15 PM

Zac Dysert may have a shot to be number one quarterback for 2013. Pathetic. 2012 all the way.

YotoJets007

11-04-2012 08:40 PM

I know few teams will forcefully draft a quarterback with many ?s in the first round because of media and society's hypes but which one first round will 2013 be comparable to?

2000: first quarterback taken in 18th.

1997: first quarterback taken in 26th.

1996: None taken in the first round.

SolidGold

11-04-2012 08:47 PM

Wasn't Matt Ryan the 3rd overall pick in 2008?

I think Barkley/Smith/Wilson all end up being first round guys. One of them is going to go really high to the Chiefs. Browns might draft one too.

YotoJets007

11-04-2012 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolidGold
(Post 3173760)

Wasn't Matt Ryan the 3rd overall pick in 2008?

I think Barkley/Smith/Wilson all end up being first round guys. One of them is going to go really high to the Chiefs. Browns might draft one too.

2000... sorry..

Menardo75

11-04-2012 09:08 PM

Andrew Luck > 2013

Halsey

11-05-2012 01:29 AM

Responses are predictable. Many people on these boards are down on every QB class prior to the respective Draft. Now they conveniently forget they were down on every QB not named Luck or Griffin.

Saints-Tigers

11-05-2012 01:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halsey
(Post 3174045)

Responses are predictable. Many people on these boards are down on every QB class prior to the respective Draft. Now they conveniently forget they were down on every QB not named Luck or Griffin.

LMAO, that's two pretty big omissions.

AntoinCD

11-05-2012 03:32 AM

As everyone has said it's 2012 and it's not even close.

Luck is the best prospect I can remember at the position. I'm not sure I would bet right now on consistent, long term success for RG3 (I don't like QBs who get hit that much and also believe to be great you need to be able to consistently pass from the pocket without gimmicks) however right now he is lighting the league up. Tannehill is a guy who I think can be a star as well and both Russell Wilson and Brandon Weeden can be serviceable starters IMO.

In this year's class I see Geno Smith, Matt Barkley and Tyler Wilson as possible franchise QBs. If I was being honest though I would say that the ceiling I see with all of these guys is a serviceable starter or slightly better than average (think someone like Philip Rivers right now, not 3 years ago). The depth in this year's class is pretty good though.

SolidGold

11-05-2012 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halsey
(Post 3174045)

Responses are predictable. Many people on these boards are down on every QB class prior to the respective Draft. Now they conveniently forget they were down on every QB not named Luck or Griffin.

I wasn't!! Loved Tannehill coming out (I liked him more than Griffin who I feel has just been a beneficiary of alot of hype) too just didn't think he was going to be this good so quickly.

y.f.s.

11-05-2012 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by soybean
(Post 3173710)

Hindsight is 20/20. Find me one person who knew Ryan tannehill would be putting up these kind of numbers and ill find you a liar.

I didn't quite expect THIS from him but I had him as the #2 QB and the fourth overall player in last year's draft. And I consistently made the argument that you CAN win with him in his rookie year. I just wasnt expecting 300 yard days and so much consistency week to week.

vidae

11-05-2012 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by y.f.s.
(Post 3174351)

I didn't quite expect THIS from him but I had him as the #2 QB and the fourth overall player in last year's draft. And I consistently made the argument that you CAN win with him in his rookie year. I just wasnt expecting 300 yard days and so much consistency week to week.

I can confirm this. yfs and I watched damn near every A&M together in IRC and we both loved Tannehill more than most. God I wanted him in KC so bad. Mehhh.

niel89

11-06-2012 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Menardo75
(Post 3173781)

Andrew Luck > 2013

This. Just Luck is considerably better than the 2013.

Mufasa

11-06-2012 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by y.f.s.
(Post 3174351)

I didn't quite expect THIS from him but I had him as the #2 QB and the fourth overall player in last year's draft. And I consistently made the argument that you CAN win with him in his rookie year. I just wasnt expecting 300 yard days and so much consistency week to week.

I'm curious as to what your problem with Griffin was/is if you had him at best 5th overall

y.f.s.

11-07-2012 01:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mufasa
(Post 3175854)

I'm curious as to what your problem with Griffin was/is if you had him at best 5th overall

I thought RG3 had a tendency to get frenetic and awkward when things broke down around him and the pocket got muddy. And that he exposed himself to a lot of big hits.

Not like I still didn't love the dude, I just thought Tannehill's skills in terms of the craft of playing QB were borderline prodigious for someone with so few starts. Not to mention, he was just as physically talented as the other two (and I think his arm was better than Luck's and just as good if not better than RG3's. Those repeated outbreaking routes to the far hash were no joke, and he did them over and over at A&M like it was nothing.).

Basically, I thought he was the QB that everybody wanted Jake Locker to be soooo bad. You could just see how massive a difference there was in terms of translatable skills between Tannehill and a guy like Sanchez - a guy with roughly the same amount of starts and way more "quality wins."

bruschis4all

11-07-2012 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by soybean
(Post 3173710)

Hindsight is 20/20. Find me one person who knew Ryan tannehill would be putting up these kind of numbers and ill find you a liar.

Gil Brandt had an article on him last year. I took him seriously because he knows a lot more about college prospects than any of us do.